early learning standards: variation across states and ...variation across states and issues to...
TRANSCRIPT
Early Learning Standards: Variation Across States and
Issues to Consider
Catherine Scott-Little, Ph.D.University of North Carolina at Greensboro
Listening and Learning about Early Learning MeetingMay 11, 2010
In this presentation
Variation in Early Learning Standards
– Content
– Implementation
Issues to consider
IA. State Variation in Content and Format of
ELS/ELG
Status of Early Learning Standards
All 50 states have early learning standards for preschool-age children
– Many have revised their documents at least once
Approximately half of the states have early learning guidelines for infants and toddlers
– Some of these have revised/are revising their documents
Content Analyses
Infant-toddler ELG
– 21 state ELG documents published as of July 2007
Preschool ELS
– 46 state ELS documents published as of January 2005
Scott-Little, Kagan, Frelow, & Reid (2008)
Scott-Little, Kagan, & Frelow (2006)
Coding Framework
Five domains– Physical Development and Motor Skills– Social and Emotional Development– Approaches Toward Learning– Language and Communication Development– Cognitive Development and General Knowledge
Elements related to specific aspects of learning and development within each domain
Basic Content Analysis Process
Read documents
Record features of the document such as the age levels addressed
Code what element of development and learning each ELG/ELS addresses
Calculate percentage of ELG/ELS that addressed each indicator on the framework
Summary of Results:
There is considerable variation in states’ early
learning standards
SUMMARY OF INFANT-TODDLER ELG ANALYSES
Organization of Infant-toddler ELGs
Age levels used
– Birth to 36 months: 8 states
– Birth to 18 and 18 to 36 months: 3 states
– 3 age levels: 5 states
– 4 ages levels: 2 states
– More than 4 age levels: 3 states
Number of I/T ELGs—Variation Across States
Number of ELG indicators
– State with fewest: 34
– State with most: 688
– Mean number of indicators: 218.2
Domains Addressed in I/T ELGs—Variation Across Age Levels
Domains Addressed in I/T ELGs—Variation Across States
SUMMARY OF PRESCHOOL ELS ANALYSES
Number of Preschool ELS—Variation Across States
Number of Indicators
– State with fewest: 42
– State with most: 434
– Mean across states: 154.3
Domains Addressed in Preschool ELS—Variation Across States
Limitations to Keep in Mind
Data are dated
Limitations within the coding system– Unevenness across the indicators and
domains
– Difficult to capture ―nuances‖
Other challenges – Important characteristics of development
are interrelated and are foundational
– Unevenness in research literature
IB. State Variation in Implementation of
ELG/ELS
Purposes for ELG/ELS
Improve quality of program/curriculum
Improve professional development
Educate parents
Guide decisions regarding assessments
Use as part of an accountability system or program evaluation
Scott-Little, Lesko, Martella & Milburn (2007)
Programs Required to Use ELS/ELG
Pre-kindergarten programs most commonly required to use ELS– 23 required by law or regulation
– 16 voluntary
States are encouraging other programs to use them– Child care
– Head Start
– IDEA
– Even Start
Implementation of ELG/ELS
In-service professional development
Teacher professional competencies
Higher education/teacher preparation programs
Alignment with curricula and assessments
Other elements of QRIS and quality improvement efforts
II. Issues and Considerations
Purpose and Target Audience
Characteristics of the target audience and purposes of ELS document must be considered
– Format of the document
– Number and wording of ELS
“Useability” of the ELS
Age range and age groupings
―Structure‖ or ―levels‖
Observable
Parsimonious
Inclusiveness of ELGs
Address all domains
Cultural and linguistic diversity
Ability-level diversity/children with disabilities
Review and Validation
Expert review
Content analysis
Age-appropriateness evaluation
– Research validation process
– Age validation study
Alignment
Alignment between standards, assessments and curricula is
– the foundation upon which we build a coherent and cohesive pedagogy for young children
– essential for success in the pre-Kindergarten through third grade movement
Both horizontal and vertical alignment are important
Analyzing Alignment
One way to look at alignment is to create a matrix to look at the extent to which content from one document ―matches‖ that of another
―Low complexity‖ analysis
Limitations of the Low Complexity Alignment Analyses
Documents may address the same content, but may be mis-aligned in their
– ―Balance‖ in areas of learning that are emphasized
– Cognitive complexity or age level
– Theoretical or philosophical orientation
– Overall quality
Even if the content ―match‖ is good, the documents may still not support high quality instruction
High Complexity Alignment Analyses
Developed a construct template used to code
– Standards and assessments
– Birth through third grade
Developed an analysis protocol to analyze the data according to four parameters:
– Balance
– Coverage
– Depth
– Difficulty
11%
39%
59%
13%
7%
10%
9.5%
11%
14%
26.5%
52%
13% 8%
19%
8%
24%
9%
38%
22%
7%
0 – 24 mths
25-36 mths
Pre-K
Kindergarten
Physical Development and Motor Skills
Social and Emotional Development
Approaches to Play and Learning
Language and Communication
Cognitive Development and General Knowledge
Example of Balance Findings—Birth through Kindergarten
Example of Depth Findings—Birth through Kindergarten
Example of Difficulty Findings—I/T, Pre-K and K
10%
22%68%
Younger Age Group More Difficult than Older Age Group (-)
Equal Difficulty (=)
Older Age Group More Difficult than Younger Age Group (+)*96 Unpaired Indicators
Difficulty:Infant/Toddler vs. Pre-
Kindergarten Total
\% of Standard Indicator Pairs
Difficulty:Pre-Kindergarten vs. Kindergarten Total
% of Standard Indicator Pairs
3%
32%65%
*184 Unpaired Indicators
Implementation
Cannot overlook the complexity of implementation
Must dedicate significant resources to ensure that the ELS are
– Infused across systems
– Used in different settings
– Used appropriately with all children
Pros and Cons of National ELS Effort Pros (if done well)
Pool national resources to address issues and produce high quality document
Conduct more in-depth analyses of content
Generate greater consensus and consistency across the country
Possible “cons”
Reflect the cultural backgrounds and values of individual states?
Age-validation within states?
―Buy in‖ from state-level stakeholders?
Alignment within states?
Implementation?
Conclusion
Sources
Scott-Little, C., Kagan, S. L., & Frelow, V. S. (Fall, 2003). Creating the Conditions for Success with Early Learning Standards: Results from a National Study of State-level Standards for Children’s Learning Prior to Kindergarten. Early Childhood Research and Practice. 5 (2). Available at http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/v5n2/little.html
Scott-Little, C., Kagan, S. L., & Frelow, V. S. (2006). Conceptualization of readiness and the content of early learning standards: The intersection of policy and research? Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 21, 153 - 173.
Scott-Little, C., Kagan, S. L. & Frelow, V. S. (in process). Early Learning Guidelines: Issues and Considerations.
Scott-Little, C., Kagan, S. L., Frelow, V. S., & Reid, J. (2008). Inside the Content of Infant-Toddler Early Learning Guidelines: Results from Analyses, Issues to Consider and Recommendations. Greensboro, NC: University of North Carolina at Greensboro.
Scott-Little, C., Lesko, J., Martella, J. & Milburn, P. (2007). Early learning standards: Results from a national survey to document trends in state-level policies and practices. Early Childhood Research and Practice, 9 (1), available at http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/v9n1/little.html
Scott-Little & Reid, J. (in press). Aligning the content of early childhood care and education to promote effective transitions. In S. L. Kagan & K. Tarrant (Eds.). Transitions in the early years: Creating a system on continuity. Baltimore, MD: Brookes Publishing.
Scott-Little, C., Cassidy, D. J., Lower, J., & Ellen, S. (in press). Early learning standards and program quality-improvements initiatives: A systemic approach to supporting children’s learning and development. In P. W. Wesley & V. Buysse (Eds). Expanding Program Quality in Early Childhood: Raising the Bar. Baltimore, MD: Brookes Publishing.